From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Simon Josefsson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Ignoring file local-variables in patches? Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 03:03:57 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1104890723 17188 80.91.229.6 (5 Jan 2005 02:05:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 02:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, drkm , miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 05 03:05:12 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Cm0Xw-0004ff-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2005 03:05:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Cm0jA-0004xS-HT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 21:16:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Cm0iY-0004X7-9p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 21:16:12 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Cm0iW-0004WC-P4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 21:16:09 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Cm0iW-0004VY-Lj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 21:16:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [217.13.230.178] (helo=yxa.extundo.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1Cm0Ws-0000CM-Ig; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 21:04:07 -0500 Original-Received: from latte.josefsson.org (c494102a.s-bi.bostream.se [217.215.27.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa.extundo.com (8.13.2/8.13.2/Debian-1) with ESMTP id j05240vV030511 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 03:04:01 +0100 Original-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com OpenPGP: id=0xB565716F; url=http://josefsson.org/key.txt Mail-Copies-To: nobody X-Hashcash: 1:23:050105:miles@gnu.org::QtzSQmw+v6HDN1JR:0000DkPj X-Hashcash: 1:23:050105:darkman_spam@yahoo.fr::epwNstN3Ydjy5t0s:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000RF1T X-Hashcash: 1:23:050105:emacs-devel@gnu.org::QEYtY46SNiPA8j7L:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000026BMx X-Hashcash: 1:23:050105:snogglethorpe@gmail.com::zjOWT0PmE/ciJHa1:00000000000000000000000000000000000002MyTf In-Reply-To: (Miles Bader's message of "Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:12:00 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/618/Mon Dec 6 00:09:24 2004 clamav-milter version 0.80j on yxa.extundo.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:31857 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:31857 Miles Bader writes: > Heh, good point... > > I often am annoyed by a similar (but more minor, and probably easier > to fix) problem: I have `copyright-update' on a save-file hook > somewhere, and it often gets confused by patches, asking if I want to > update the copyright in a patch that updates the copyright! That reminds me: copyright-update try to update the first copyright message in a file, but it is frequently the last one the is the current one. For example: Copyright 1995 Foo Bar Copyright 1996, 1999, 2003 Simon Josefsson When I save a file that contain the above, copyright-update try to add 2005 to the first copyright line. In some projects, I have solved this by moving my copyright line first, as in: Copyright 1996, 1999, 2003 Simon Josefsson Copyright 1995 Foo Bar but this is slightly disrespectful, I think. Proposed solution: Have copyright-update search the next 10 lines after the first found copyright line, to see if it can find more current copyright headers to update. What do people think? Is this a poor idea for some reason?